On 8 October 2010 20:51, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
Vinzenz Vietzke wrote:
Am 08.10.2010 11:02, schrieb Jakob Gruber:
I agree, there should be no exceptions made in the AUR, not for TUs, not for devs, and not for arch-haskell (or anybody else). The same rules should apply to all.
Dito! Perhaps orphaning such packages puts some pressure on their maintainers. So there could even be some "educational" side effect...
vinz.
Actually, Peter's latest angry message seems to have convinced Don to step down, effectively eliminating the Arch Haskell group unless others step up to handle it.
Considering the large number of packages (thousands) that he managed to keep up to date with few issues, I personally think this is a considerable loss for the community. People take such contributions for granted and instead of appreciating them they get bitchy when those contributions don't meet all of their expectations. Being 1.5 weeks behind due to life getting in the way is completely understandable.
Plus this entire discussion ignores my original question of whether the maintainer had been contacted, as per standard procedure when an orphan request is posted. Past frustrations do not change that. Personally, I would not be very inclined to spend even more of my time rushing an update to help someone who is generally very rude to me, and I doubt that many of you would either.
The whole situation is unfortunate.
I might be a bit too harsh in my post, I think Don did an incredible job. However I still think that Haskell packages should not have an exception for orphaning.